...I refused to do business with people in Utah because of their inability to deal with electing senators...
I wouldn't hold every person in an entire state accountable for their Senators. Whether the Senators are cretins or gifted orators, it is mighty hard to get rid of Senator once they get elected. Like it or not, incumbants get re-elected a lot.
Even worse is that in a conservative state like Utah, it is nearly impossible to unseat a sitting Republican Senator. Unless he retires or gets caught spanking the monkey while a hooker runs around his car at traffic lights (ala Jimmy Swaggart), he will get re-elected again and again. And the longer he stays in the senate, the more seniority and power he gains.
Being from New York, we have had to suffer Senator D'Amato and then Senator Clinton. I wouldn't want to be judged by either one of those ass clowns. And yet that is exactly what you are saying is appropriate and reasonable.
At my last company, I redirected any pr0n and MP3 websites I found in the logs to a webpage containing an image of big brother from Apple's 1984 commercial. Underneath the image were the words "BIG BROTHER IS WATCHING". Below that was the company's Internet policy and a note saying that sometimes this page was reached by accident and that only multiple instances of violating company Internet policy were investigated.
I actually did this to help the employees. The management regularly asked me to scan the logs for prohibited activity. I didn't feel it was my job to get people fired so I just scared the crap out of those violating the policy. Subsequently I never had to get anyone fired as big brother quickly extinguished all prohibited activity. Unsubtle but very effective.
"Contrary to the speculation of Eric Raymond, Microsoft did not orchestrate or participate in the BayStar transaction."
"Microsoft has no direct or indirect financial relationship with BayStar."
Those two statements are very close to lies but may just be deceptive statements that omit very important facts. I say this because it actually appears that Paul Allen orchestrated the SCO investment. I say this because:
So Paul Allen is in a position to advise and influence both MS and Baystar. He also has significant financial holdings in both companies. There is no tinfoil hat necessary to draw this connection.
Second the MS antitrust judge Kollar Kotelly needs to be informed as well. What MS is doing is directly against her ruling.
The Technical Committee is responsible for enforcing the Final Judgement from the MS anti-trust case. You can submit complaints about MS possibly violating the Final Judgement to them. However when I emailed them, they sent me back the following reply:
The Technical Committee has received your email dated March 9th, 2004, regarding SCO Group and Microsoft Corp. The issues you raise in your communication are not within the scope of the Technical Committee's mandate to assist the United States and the Settling States in the enforcement of the consent decree with Microsoft.
For more information regarding the Governments' antitrust lawsuit against Microsoft or the settlement in the United States District Court for the District of Columbia, the following websites may be helpful:
http://www.dcd.uscourts.gov/microsoft-2001.html - District Court site
http://www.usdoj.gov/atr/cases/ms_index.htm - Department of Justice site
http://www.microsoft-antitrust.gov - Joint States site
http://www.microsoft.com/legal/settlementprogram - Microsoft
Thank you for your interest in the Microsoft antitrust litigation and the Technical Committee. Any future correspondence may be addressed to complaints@thetc.org.
I do not agree with their assessment as they are charged with enforcing the Final Judgement, which states the following:
Section III. Prohibited Conduct
F. Microsoft shall not retaliate against any ISV [Independent Software Vendor] or IHV [Independent Hardware Vendor] because of that ISV's or IHV's:
1. developing, using, distributing, promoting or supporting any software that competes with Microsoft Platform Software or any software that runs on any software that competes with Microsoft Platform Software, or
2. exercising any of the options or alternatives provided for under this Final Judgment.
I think that MS's alleged behavior in the SCO matter clearly falls under that section and warrants an investigation. But the Technical Committee is saying that this is not their job. However, I saw no qualifiers on their website limiting their enforcement to particular sections of the Final Judgement. Perhaps when a clearer picture of MS's actions emerges, they will be more inclined to investigate but I suspect it will fall to the Justice Department to investigate.
You don't have to go with an iMac. You can actually use a MS OS provided you remove/disable/hide the MS applications--that is, Internet Explorer, MS Office or Outlook. I gave my parents Opera and Open Office. They are quite happy to use those instead of the virus/worm prone MS applications.
This is my weapon (waving $100M from MS in third party checks)
This is my gun (waving handgun)
This is for suing (waving $100M from MS in third party checks)
This is for my paranoid delusions of grandeur (waving handgun)
What's wrong with a company pushing people to use their products? I am not a fan of Microsoft, but why shuold they be forced to include third-party software?
Nothing. Provided you do not have a monopoly and illegally use that monopoly to remove choice from the marketplace as Microsoft has done. Forcing MS to carry third-party software is a remedy for MS actions. Had MS not broken the law, a remedy would not be required. MS has not one to blame for this except itself.
But these guys who learn Klingon (Add now Elvish) are out there, a solid 12 or more.
I think Gencon is probably the only place where there may actually be a need for Klingon-Elvish translators. It's a Klingon that speaks Elvish. It's an Elf that speaks Klingon. It's a hellish creature made in the darkest depths of geekdom. Run away!
I think "robotic pants" refers to a lower extremity exoskeleton that helps people walk. While this one could definitely use some serious miniaturization, it gives a pretty good idea of what the ultimate goal is.
Re:A card is more than just a magnetic strip...
on
The Universal Card
·
· Score: 1
Walmart actually had to sue Visa and MasterCard for the right to accept debit cards as either credit cards or debit cards. Before 1 Jan 2004, all merchants were required to follow the rules as laid out by the credit card companies. The merchants also had to accept the debit cards if they accepted the credit cards. Visa and MasterCard settled the lawsuit last year and agreed to change their rules.
I have found that treating my userbase as people, and not as trained monkeys, tends to have better results than trying to be mister 31337 BOFH.
Really?! I bet that explains the negative response I get every time I email this to one of the simians howling about some computer problem I'm supposed to fix for them.
Vet (v.tr.): To subject to thorough examination or evaluation.
Are you suggesting that IBM would randomly choose 232 files out of potentially thousands or, based on your math, millions? Given the professionalism of IBM's lawyers, I don't think a rand function was at all involved in IBM's selection. It was purposeful and they offered it voluntarily knowing full well that the court would accept it. The judge gave IBM the additional gift of saying that SCO must prove to the court that they require any code beyond what IBM volunteered. This was a calculated and planned strategic move on the part of IBM.
It is easy to get caught up in procedural issues. But the basic point is that IBM has effectively limited the scope of the case to code of its choosing. This is a clear and unequivocal victory for IBM. A victory that will undoubtedly significantly affect future issues.
But the key here is that SCO must show -why- they need the [additional] files.
The judge has just let IBM control what code SCO gets to see. IBM would not offer to hand over 232 files containing their code without having fully vetted it first. I guarantee they did extensive computer analyses of the code before ever making the offer. They know what, if any of this code is in Linux, exactly how it got there and can verify copyright ownership. SCO can do all the fishing it wants but IBM already knows what is in there. It is highly unlikely that SCO will be allowed access to any more IBM code unless they have some truly compelling reason.
SCO has no proof that any of its libraries were used. In fact, it is pure speculation on their part. In their suplemental response to interogatory #8 in SCO vs IBM they say:
Upon information and belief, Autozone's new Linux based software implemented by IBM featured SCO's shared libraries which had been stripped out of SCO's UNIX based OpenServer by IBM and embedded inside Autozone's Linux implementation in order to continue to allow the continued operation of Autozone's legacy applications. The basis for SCO's belief is the precision and efficiency with which the migration to Linux occurred, which suggests the use of shared libraries to run legacy applications on Linux.
SCO's lawsuit is based upon the belief that AutoZone's conversion to Linux could not have occurred without using SCO's libraries. They have no facts to support this belief and plainly state that it is speculation using the phrase "which suggests". As if SCO doesn't have enough weak ass lawsuits already. I expect AutoZone to go for a quick dismissal of the case provided they are not using the libraries. They only have to prove they are not using SCO's libraries, which could be done quite easily.
14. The article innaccurately claims that HardOCP "compiled and researched all of the publicly available information we could find." Clearly this in not the case or you are not very good at finding publicly available information. There are many public records that could have disproved elements of your story. These were either not consulted or deemed to be unworthy of mention.
How could HardOPC's statement possibly be innaccurate? It has the qualifier "we could find" at the end. The lawyer then argues that the article was not well researched but fails to provide any examples of publicly available information that were not consulted. I'm sure this guy got paid thousands of dollars to research and write this letter. And he can't even form a halfway decent argument.
I could see this as a viable option if no company were interested in providing broadband service to the town/city. But based on what happened with cable I don't see this turning out to be that great for the taxpayers.
In the 80s a number of municipalities paid to run cable lines or subsidized the installation costs. But now many of those government-paid cable lines are de facto controlled or even owned by the cable companies. Ultimately, the cable companies were able to do this because a little bit of money goes a long way in local politics. Will this not just happen again with the fiber?
In your attempt to paint this as the giant evil corporation using people like Kleenex you missed that there will be a seperation package.
Separation packages can suck. Mine was 1 week of pay after 4.5 years of service, which is substandard by any measure. It's little wonder you see ads from Software & Information Industry Association tech job sites encouraging you to report software piracy. SIIA understands that many companies are really treating IT workers like Kleenex.
I wonder if it'll work even if the govenment has embedded the RFID chip inside my head? Maybe I need to put RFID blocker inside my head too. Anyone good with power tools?
So, please, if any of you know the drug dealers who routinely pass out free weed, point them my way.
My comments were specific to crystal meth, which is marketed differently than other drugs. Nobody is going to give away weed or cocaine as there is no need. Crystal meth is a huge problem in rural areas precisely because of how it is marketed. A drug dealer can set up a production lab in a rural area and create a supply but have no market. They then initiate a demand through the free giveaways. Then there is sufficient demand to meet the supply. Crystal meth is supply side driven and not demand driven in the startup phase, which is unlike other drugs where the demand is pre-existing.
In the world of crystal meth, the drug dealers do in fact create a market by giving away meth in new areas. Then a number of the recipients of the free samples will be hooked. The drug dealers have created market for their product that did not exist previously.
In New Jersey under Gov Whitman, the state cut personal income taxes but to make up for the difference they went after small businesses. The kind of small businesses where cash sales were involved. The NJ state government would estimate the taxes on small businesses it thought were actually making more money. The estimated tax was what the small businesses had to pay unless they could prove otherwise. This MA system will undoubtedly be used to go after small businesses.
In addition, this MA system will do nothing to effect the ability of wealthy individuals to use tax shelters. Part of the deal with getting a tax shelter is that you get a letter from an "independent" accounting lawyer stating that he/she believes that tax shelter is valid. This generally shields the wealthy individuals from penalities if the tax shelter turns out to be untenable. The wealthy individual will still have to pay interest on the tax owed but penalties are generally waived by the IRS if there is a letter.
If we are forced to carry national ID cards with embedded RFID chips, how long will it take before the government mandates the chips be permanently implanted in citizens?
If I keep having these thoughts, I'm going to have to add a layer of mylar to my tinfoil hat.
I've given up on getting a computer job anytime soon. My job hunt is focussed on getting a non-computer job in an area where I have some skills and experience (ie, I had to do non-computer work before when Bush I was in office). However, I plan on keeping my certifications up to date. I hoping that sooner or later I'll wind up back working with computers.
In the short term, computer jobs are going to be very difficult to land. I was replaced by someone making $3 an hour and it's hard to compete with those economics. The problem is that right now China, India, Malaysia and others are artificially keeping their currency low relative to the dollar. China is the worst with an exchange rate fixed to the US dollar. Malaysia does not have a fixed exchange rate but it is very difficult to trade Malaysian currency. India has some currency controls but not as bad as Malaysia, which is why their relative costs have gone up a little.
If these currency controls were eliminated tomorrow, we'd see a rapid increase in the cost of sending jobs overseas. But I don't think this current administration is at all concerned with doing anything to prevent jobs from going overseas. I actually heard the president say that US workers need to get education and training to compete. I have education and training but I cannot compete because the playing field is not level.
Slashdot Mirror
I wouldn't hold every person in an entire state accountable for their Senators. Whether the Senators are cretins or gifted orators, it is mighty hard to get rid of Senator once they get elected. Like it or not, incumbants get re-elected a lot.
Even worse is that in a conservative state like Utah, it is nearly impossible to unseat a sitting Republican Senator. Unless he retires or gets caught spanking the monkey while a hooker runs around his car at traffic lights (ala Jimmy Swaggart), he will get re-elected again and again. And the longer he stays in the senate, the more seniority and power he gains.
Being from New York, we have had to suffer Senator D'Amato and then Senator Clinton. I wouldn't want to be judged by either one of those ass clowns. And yet that is exactly what you are saying is appropriate and reasonable.
I actually did this to help the employees. The management regularly asked me to scan the logs for prohibited activity. I didn't feel it was my job to get people fired so I just scared the crap out of those violating the policy. Subsequently I never had to get anyone fired as big brother quickly extinguished all prohibited activity. Unsubtle but very effective.
Nah, they'll just use their real logo.
"Microsoft has no direct or indirect financial relationship with BayStar."
Those two statements are very close to lies but may just be deceptive statements that omit very important facts. I say this because it actually appears that Paul Allen orchestrated the SCO investment. I say this because:
- Paul Allen is a former member of the board of directors of MS and the second largest shareholder. Paul Allen now serves as a senior strategy advisor to top Microsoft executives.
- Paul Allen is one of the largest investors in BayStar Capital.
So Paul Allen is in a position to advise and influence both MS and Baystar. He also has significant financial holdings in both companies. There is no tinfoil hat necessary to draw this connection.The Technical Committee is responsible for enforcing the Final Judgement from the MS anti-trust case. You can submit complaints about MS possibly violating the Final Judgement to them. However when I emailed them, they sent me back the following reply:
I do not agree with their assessment as they are charged with enforcing the Final Judgement, which states the following:
I think that MS's alleged behavior in the SCO matter clearly falls under that section and warrants an investigation. But the Technical Committee is saying that this is not their job. However, I saw no qualifiers on their website limiting their enforcement to particular sections of the Final Judgement. Perhaps when a clearer picture of MS's actions emerges, they will be more inclined to investigate but I suspect it will fall to the Justice Department to investigate.You don't have to go with an iMac. You can actually use a MS OS provided you remove/disable/hide the MS applications--that is, Internet Explorer, MS Office or Outlook. I gave my parents Opera and Open Office. They are quite happy to use those instead of the virus/worm prone MS applications.
This is my weapon (waving $100M from MS in third party checks)
This is my gun (waving handgun)
This is for suing (waving $100M from MS in third party checks)
This is for my paranoid delusions of grandeur (waving handgun)
Nothing. Provided you do not have a monopoly and illegally use that monopoly to remove choice from the marketplace as Microsoft has done. Forcing MS to carry third-party software is a remedy for MS actions. Had MS not broken the law, a remedy would not be required. MS has not one to blame for this except itself.
I think Gencon is probably the only place where there may actually be a need for Klingon-Elvish translators. It's a Klingon that speaks Elvish. It's an Elf that speaks Klingon. It's a hellish creature made in the darkest depths of geekdom. Run away!
I think "robotic pants" refers to a lower extremity exoskeleton that helps people walk. While this one could definitely use some serious miniaturization, it gives a pretty good idea of what the ultimate goal is.
Walmart actually had to sue Visa and MasterCard for the right to accept debit cards as either credit cards or debit cards. Before 1 Jan 2004, all merchants were required to follow the rules as laid out by the credit card companies. The merchants also had to accept the debit cards if they accepted the credit cards. Visa and MasterCard settled the lawsuit last year and agreed to change their rules.
Really?! I bet that explains the negative response I get every time I email this to one of the simians howling about some computer problem I'm supposed to fix for them.
Are you suggesting that IBM would randomly choose 232 files out of potentially thousands or, based on your math, millions? Given the professionalism of IBM's lawyers, I don't think a rand function was at all involved in IBM's selection. It was purposeful and they offered it voluntarily knowing full well that the court would accept it. The judge gave IBM the additional gift of saying that SCO must prove to the court that they require any code beyond what IBM volunteered. This was a calculated and planned strategic move on the part of IBM.
It is easy to get caught up in procedural issues. But the basic point is that IBM has effectively limited the scope of the case to code of its choosing. This is a clear and unequivocal victory for IBM. A victory that will undoubtedly significantly affect future issues.
The judge has just let IBM control what code SCO gets to see. IBM would not offer to hand over 232 files containing their code without having fully vetted it first. I guarantee they did extensive computer analyses of the code before ever making the offer. They know what, if any of this code is in Linux, exactly how it got there and can verify copyright ownership. SCO can do all the fishing it wants but IBM already knows what is in there. It is highly unlikely that SCO will be allowed access to any more IBM code unless they have some truly compelling reason.
In the 80s a number of municipalities paid to run cable lines or subsidized the installation costs. But now many of those government-paid cable lines are de facto controlled or even owned by the cable companies. Ultimately, the cable companies were able to do this because a little bit of money goes a long way in local politics. Will this not just happen again with the fiber?
Separation packages can suck. Mine was 1 week of pay after 4.5 years of service, which is substandard by any measure. It's little wonder you see ads from Software & Information Industry Association tech job sites encouraging you to report software piracy. SIIA understands that many companies are really treating IT workers like Kleenex.
I wonder if it'll work even if the govenment has embedded the RFID chip inside my head? Maybe I need to put RFID blocker inside my head too. Anyone good with power tools?
My comments were specific to crystal meth, which is marketed differently than other drugs. Nobody is going to give away weed or cocaine as there is no need. Crystal meth is a huge problem in rural areas precisely because of how it is marketed. A drug dealer can set up a production lab in a rural area and create a supply but have no market. They then initiate a demand through the free giveaways. Then there is sufficient demand to meet the supply. Crystal meth is supply side driven and not demand driven in the startup phase, which is unlike other drugs where the demand is pre-existing.
In the world of crystal meth, the drug dealers do in fact create a market by giving away meth in new areas. Then a number of the recipients of the free samples will be hooked. The drug dealers have created market for their product that did not exist previously.
In addition, this MA system will do nothing to effect the ability of wealthy individuals to use tax shelters. Part of the deal with getting a tax shelter is that you get a letter from an "independent" accounting lawyer stating that he/she believes that tax shelter is valid. This generally shields the wealthy individuals from penalities if the tax shelter turns out to be untenable. The wealthy individual will still have to pay interest on the tax owed but penalties are generally waived by the IRS if there is a letter.
<motorhead>
It's certainly not good if there is a hungry Lemme in the vicinity.
</motorhead>
If I keep having these thoughts, I'm going to have to add a layer of mylar to my tinfoil hat.
In the short term, computer jobs are going to be very difficult to land. I was replaced by someone making $3 an hour and it's hard to compete with those economics. The problem is that right now China, India, Malaysia and others are artificially keeping their currency low relative to the dollar. China is the worst with an exchange rate fixed to the US dollar. Malaysia does not have a fixed exchange rate but it is very difficult to trade Malaysian currency. India has some currency controls but not as bad as Malaysia, which is why their relative costs have gone up a little.
If these currency controls were eliminated tomorrow, we'd see a rapid increase in the cost of sending jobs overseas. But I don't think this current administration is at all concerned with doing anything to prevent jobs from going overseas. I actually heard the president say that US workers need to get education and training to compete. I have education and training but I cannot compete because the playing field is not level.